Star Trek 2

So apparently filming starts tomorrow, lot's of new additions to the cast, and KHAN is rumored to be the villain, although with this whole, altered time line, I was hoping to see something new/different but then again, that is just a rumor, I'm stoked.. call this pre-mature, but enjoyed the first!

PSN o0o_BOOST_o0oXBL oo BOOST LEE oo

Originally Posted by MidnightSpecial

I'm saying that after 6 hours of angry man on man sex, the MKIV still smelt like an MKIV.

So apparently filming starts tomorrow, lot's of new additions to the cast, and KHAN is rumored to be the villain, although with this whole, altered time line, I was hoping to see something new/different but then again, that is just a rumor, I'm stoked.. call this pre-mature, but enjoyed the first!

My wife enjoyed the first one more than I did (I stopped watching after the first half hour or so and only saw bits and pieces of the rest of it - didn't do anything for me), my Star Trek days are long over and when I do feel the nostalgic need, I still go towards the original. I'm not a big fan of all these reboots that are going on anyway.

But seeing as how Wrath of Khan is probably still my favorite of the series, I would be interested to see what they do with it.

I can't see ANYONE but Ricardo Montalban in that role. MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY, though, the whole point of the timeline reset was to put the old characters into new scenarios. Khan was awesome, but has been done.

In my opinion, we either need a cerebral, scientific movie, or some serious Federation vs. Klingons vs. Romulans action.

But just to play along (digs out the 'ol dusty Spock ears from the closet), I agree that if the whole purpose was to "reboot" the series, then at least come up with some new and unique villains or situations. Don't make it a remake on top of a reboot. If they are not going to create something new with the series, then they may as well just remake Wrath of Khan. I always thought that the Star Trek universe was infinitely huge and for the most part, the various shows and movies always seemed to focus on the same things over and over again.

Nope, reboot of the franchise with liberties taken with the original cannon to make it more gritty/edgy/hip for today's audiences.

It is an alternate reality/timeline. If, as you say, you didn't watch the whole movie, then you missed the part where the original Spock explains it.

Nero's arrival in the past, destroying the Kelvin and killing George Kirk, as well as everyone who was killed in the battle at Vulcan and the destruction of Vulcan, created an alternate timeline. The original, older Spock exists in the new timeline as well.

It is an alternate reality/timeline. If, as you say, you didn't watch the whole movie, then you missed the part where the original Spock explains it.

Nero's arrival in the past, destroying the Kelvin and killing George Kirk, as well as everyone who was killed in the battle at Vulcan and the destruction of Vulcan, created an alternate timeline. The original, older Spock exists in the new timeline as well.

So yeah, it's a reboot, but it's also an alternate timeline/reality.

Taking that further, Kahn would still exist and could still be a threat, since he existed long before the events in Star Trek.

Originally Posted by 20aeman

No, the real enthusiast vehicle would be the RX8. It combines V12 Lamborghini gas mileage with Hyundai Genesis 4cyl. performance.

It is an alternate reality/timeline. If, as you say, you didn't watch the whole movie, then you missed the part where the original Spock explains it.

Nero's arrival in the past, destroying the Kelvin and killing George Kirk, as well as everyone who was killed in the battle at Vulcan and the destruction of Vulcan, created an alternate timeline. The original, older Spock exists in the new timeline as well.

So yeah, it's a reboot, but it's also an alternate timeline/reality.

don't forget the Klingon where wiped out too, almost.. (in the deleted scenes)

Have to agree. The last one did not have any memorable feeling the original and TNG cast ever did. As they said the bridge came out of an apple store.
The engine room was nothing original, it was shot in a damn factory.
No special thinking or deep meaning to the plot like in many of the other movies. It was built to be more edgy and fast paced to appeal to a newer audience who do not have the patience to listen to the enlightened commentary or more complex stories the older movies brought out.

Have to agree. The last one did not have any memorable feeling the original and TNG cast ever did. As they said the bridge came out of an apple store.
The engine room was nothing original, it was shot in a damn factory.
No special thinking or deep meaning to the plot like in many of the other movies. It was built to be more edgy and fast paced to appeal to a newer audience who do not have the patience to listen to the enlightened commentary or more complex stories the older movies brought out.

"Enlightened commentary or more complex stories"? Which Star Trek movies had those qualities? Wrath of Kahn was the best of the lot and that was a Ricardo Montalban retread of a TV episode. And then there was that incredibly complex "save the whales" plot in "Star Trek: The Voyage Home".

The most recent Star Trek was a fun summer fluff movie. Uhura was hot. Kirk got laid. Hell, even Spock got laid. It had some funny parts like Chekov struggling with voice recognition of his security code. Kirk saves the universe in the end. Left satisfied.

Have to agree. The last one did not have any memorable feeling the original and TNG cast ever did. As they said the bridge came out of an apple store.
The engine room was nothing original, it was shot in a damn factory.
No special thinking or deep meaning to the plot like in many of the other movies. It was built to be more edgy and fast paced to appeal to a newer audience who do not have the patience to listen to the enlightened commentary or more complex stories the older movies brought out.

You might be giving TNG and the movies too much credit. While I didnt watch the series with any regularity, nor do I believe I saw the movies, if you grew up on those shows, you remember them with a certain element of nostalgia, in that everything was better THEN. Personally, I have experienced this with Knight Rider, A-Team, and Air Wolf. They are now funny to watch, but you see so many gaffes and realize how bad some of the actors were. But none were epic or ground breaking, despite our tendencies to suspend belief and reality when watching them...even now.

Nothing about the reboot, in my opinion, felt forced or out of context. I don't think the bridge looked THAT much like an apple store, but then again, anything futuristic, in any movie, ends up looking the same. And where was the original shot? I'd imagine on some lot in Hollywood. You also have to realize that one movie cannot have such a complex story line when you are, essentially, starting the franchise from scratch. We're more than a decade removed from SNG - the teenagers now don't have the same connection to the series that they did then. We're in a different world now, its all fast-paced. The movie did fine for what it is. Keep up.

You might be giving TNG and the movies too much credit. While I didnt watch the series with any regularity, nor do I believe I saw the movies, if you grew up on those shows, you remember them with a certain element of nostalgia, in that everything was better THEN. Personally, I have experienced this with Knight Rider, A-Team, and Air Wolf. They are now funny to watch, but you see so many gaffes and realize how bad some of the actors were. But none were epic or ground breaking, despite our tendencies to suspend belief and reality when watching them...even now.

I'd have to agree with this - it's like the new Doctor Who. My wife loves it, it makes me want to go out and kill little fuzzy things. I grew up watching the old classic series (cardboard scenery and all) and just can't get into the new one. It's just the nostalgia I have for the old shows that won't allow me to get into the new one. Battlestar Galactica is another one where I just can't get into the new one and still prefer the old corny original.

I give the early TNG where not the best in terms of age. But the acting and writing improved dramatically after The Best of Both Worlds.

On that note, I think the movies have held up better than people think. I still watch them today. But again its the story, the pacing and the character interactions that drove the original and TNG crews. Go back to Undiscovered Country and see if you can find any scifi (if any) movies written today with that kind of plot and depth of character exploration. Kirk had to fight his own demon's and prejudice that gave his enemies the opportunity to put him in that position as the pawn. In every movie, there was some kind of intellectual debate on an issue that came up. In Wrath of Khan, it was the ethics of the Genesis Project or the debate about facing death with the Kobyashi Maru as the point in subject. Search for Spock had Kirk turning against Starfleet. Heck even the most derived of the series Star Trek V had the debate on god and if a person needs their pain. Go to Picards time and we have the subject of revenge when it came to the Borg in First Contact or debating the (as it has been said many times) the needs of the many vs the needs of the few in Insurrection.

Series need to develop and move on. Even by Undiscovered Country, the series had passed Roddenberry's original vision to something he did not like. But it had to move on and I had no problem with that. I think the proceeding stores kept in line with the base concepts he set down.

I even enjoyed the A Team reboot since the original looking back was campy and cheesy as hell. But A Team was about fixing problems by shooting your way out of it. Star Trek is one of those series who's original concepts should survive the test of time and be presented in a new light to the newer audience. I don't believe Abrams can do that. I think the actors have the capacity to continue and represent what the older crew could do. If you want to keep an EMO Kirk fine, shaky cam fine, give me a decent Engine Bay at least and better battle sequences that rival Sacrifice of Angels.

I will be watching ST2 since I am a fan of the franchise as a whole. Like Star Trek as a whole, always the optimist, they can only improve from here.

I'll have to watch the movies before commenting further...but a question:

Were the movies essentially long TV episodes, based on the series? Or standalone films telling their own stories? In other words, which came first?

For both the TOS (The Original Series) crew and the TNG (The Next Generation) crew, the movies were new stories, based at a later time than the TV series.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture was set decades after TOS (basically as many years between the end of TOS and ST:TMP in real time). The original Enterprise, a Constitution Class Heavy Cruiser, has been returned to spacedock for refit, receiving new engines, equipment, and tech, which explains the new, but similar, look of the ship. In the intervening years, Kirk had been promoted to Admiral and is head of Starfleet Operations. In my opinion, ST:TMP feels like a classic Trek episode, with a scientific mission and minimal violence. ST II:TWOK has much more ship combat and violence, presumably to make it more action-y, but characterization is still strong.

I recall Star Trek: Generations being criticized as feeling like a long TV episode. It is set only a short amount of time following the end of the ST:TNG series, maybe only a few months or a year. The later TNG crew movies feel "bigger" and less like a TV episode, I think partially because of the new ship.

I liked JJ Trek. Yeah, it wasn't as "deep" as prior films, but it was still fun and played plenty of homage to TOS, with familiar sounds and in-jokes.

For both the TOS (The Original Series) crew and the TNG (The Next Generation) crew, the movies were new stories, based at a later time than the TV series.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture was set decades after TOS (basically as many years between the end of TOS and ST:TMP in real time). The original Enterprise, a Constitution Class Heavy Cruiser, has been returned to spacedock for refit, receiving new engines, equipment, and tech, which explains the new, but similar, look of the ship. In the intervening years, Kirk had been promoted to Admiral and is head of Starfleet Operations. In my opinion, ST:TMP feels like a classic Trek episode, with a scientific mission and minimal violence. ST II:TWOK has much more ship combat and violence, presumably to make it more action-y, but characterization is still strong.

I recall Star Trek: Generations being criticized as feeling like a long TV episode. It is set only a short amount of time following the end of the ST:TNG series, maybe only a few months or a year. The later TNG crew movies feel "bigger" and less like a TV episode, I think partially because of the new ship.

I liked JJ Trek. Yeah, it wasn't as "deep" as prior films, but it was still fun and played plenty of homage to TOS, with familiar sounds and in-jokes.

Your explanation gets to my next point - character development was done in the show, so the movies didn't need as much. The audience already had a connection with the product, there by making the movies easier. For the JJ Star Trek, no such connection exists. While considered a reboot by many, you can consider it just a fresh movie with no past connections and a standalone franchise. So, to that end, it opened and closed enough story lines to make the movie work, irrespective of past movies or series.